Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Expected FPS in Starcraft 2

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 16, 2010 8:09:54 PM

Does anyone know what fps is to be expected from an overclocked AMD Phenom X6 1090T @ 4Ghz , together with a Radeon HD 5870 Graphics card in Stracraft 2 with the highest possible settings?

More about : expected fps starcraft

August 16, 2010 8:22:20 PM

Dont know the exact number, but it will definitely be above playable!
m
0
l
a c 105 à CPUs
August 16, 2010 8:38:45 PM

in ultra settings @ 1680x1050, i average 67 FPS in single player

phenom II x4 @ 3.6ghz & GTX460
m
0
l
Related resources
August 16, 2010 10:55:38 PM

you'll get more than 67 fps then pacfisit. 5870 is much better card than gtx 460. expect performance around 100fps. not sure about the cpu though
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
August 16, 2010 11:13:37 PM

Pasifist said:
Does anyone know what fps is to be expected from an overclocked AMD Phenom X6 1090T @ 4Ghz , together with a Radeon HD 5870 Graphics card in Stracraft 2 with the highest possible settings?


What Resolution?

Without AA


With 4xAA
m
0
l
a c 105 à CPUs
August 17, 2010 12:27:20 AM

Pasifist said:
1920x1080 or 1920x1200. What CPUs are these results with? Or will the graphics card be the bottleneck anyway? With an X6 1090T that is.


SC2 only uses two cores so the extra cores will add little benefit

see the link below

http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performan...
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
August 17, 2010 12:29:57 AM

It's times like these that we see the true capabilities of the Intel Nehalem architecture.
m
0
l
August 17, 2010 12:34:32 AM

loneninja said:
Your 1090T is going to be the bottleneck, even at 4.0Ghz a stock I7 will probably perform better.
http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/page13.html


I did not quite understand how you can assume that with a basis from these results? X6 is not even there? Did you look at the X4 processors and they perform around the same? I'm not questioning you or being rude, I'm just not very into this :) 
m
0
l
a c 83 à CPUs
August 17, 2010 12:43:48 AM

Pasifist said:
I did not quite understand how you can assume that with a basis from these results? X6 is not even there? Did you look at the X4 processors and they perform around the same? I'm not questioning you or being rude, I'm just not very into this :) 


It is a dual threaded game, you notice the Phenom II X2 and X4 pull the exact same FPS when clocked at 3.8Ghz? It'll be the same for your X6, the extra cores simply aren't used. You'll also see that at 3.8Ghz, Phenom II looses to a stock I7 920, and the extra 200mhz won't make up that large of a difference. The bright side is you could render a video or something in the background while playing Starcraft. :lol: 
m
0
l
August 17, 2010 12:52:04 AM

loneninja said:
It is a dual threaded game, you notice the Phenom II X2 and X4 pull the exact same FPS when clocked at 3.8Ghz? It'll be the same for your X6, the extra cores simply aren't used. You'll also see that at 3.8Ghz, Phenom II looses to a stock I7 920, and the extra 200mhz won't make up that large of a difference. The bright side is you could render a video or something in the background while playing Starcraft. :lol: 


Haha yeah, the usefullness of that could be questioned ;)  But what about other games like Dirt 2 and Bad Company 2, they do take advantage of additional cores don't they? And does the X6 actually perform noticably better in that situation. And last, in that case, will it be a trend that new games tend to utilise more cores and thus making the X6 a good option for a long-lasting CPU for the next years?

(Pardon my English, not from an English speaking country)
m
0
l
a c 105 à CPUs
August 17, 2010 1:08:45 AM

Pasifist said:
Haha yeah, the usefullness of that could be questioned ;)  But what about other games like Dirt 2 and Bad Company 2, they do take advantage of additional cores don't they? And does the X6 actually perform noticably better in that situation. And last, in that case, will it be a trend that new games tend to utilise more cores and thus making the X6 a good option for a long-lasting CPU for the next years?

(Pardon my English, not from an English speaking country)


actually Bad Company 2 plays just fine on a fast dual core (E8400+) and most PC games are simply console ports or made for the PC masses. Intel and AMD have both been screaming the sky is falling for dual cores for four years now...they are still viable gaming CPUs even now. By the time you actually need 6 cores for games, the x6 will be ancient history....which in PC terms is like 3+ years....
m
0
l
a c 83 à CPUs
August 17, 2010 3:20:26 AM

Pasifist said:
One more question then :)  http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/amd_10...

The X6 performs quite good in these tests? even outperforming an overclocked i7 930? I find this rather confusing, how can these results be explained? Thanks for all of your answers:) 


:o  I can't explain those results, just about every review I've seen of every game shows the Phenom II X6 loosing to an I7, or being about equal to it. That review shows it stomping the I7, rather interesting.
m
0
l
!